From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matan Barak Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] IB core: Display 64 bit counters from the extended set Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 17:20:57 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20151211182532.332343651@linux.com> <20151211182543.329283794@linux.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Doug Ledford , linux-rdma , Jason Gunthorpe List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 4:55 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Mon, 14 Dec 2015, Matan Barak wrote: > >> > +static PORT_PMA_ATTR(unicast_rcv_packets , 0, 64, 384, IB_PMA_PORT_COUNTERS_EXT); >> > +static PORT_PMA_ATTR(multicast_xmit_packets , 0, 64, 448, IB_PMA_PORT_COUNTERS_EXT); >> > +static PORT_PMA_ATTR(multicast_rcv_packets , 0, 64, 512, IB_PMA_PORT_COUNTERS_EXT); >> > >> >> Why do we use 0 as the counter argument for all EXT counters? > > No idea what the counter is doing. Saw another EXT counter implementation > use 0 so I thought that was fine. It seems like a counter index, but I might be wrong though. If it is, don't we want to preserve the existing non-EXT schema for the new counters too? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html